December 4, 2015

The Fate and Legacy of Bolivarianism in Venezuela’s Dec 6th Election

Will the Dec. 6 Parliamentary Election in
Venezuela determine the fate of Chavismo “21st century socialism”?

President Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela faces
probably the biggest challenge of his incumbency so far. Venezuelans will head
to the polls on December 6 for the parliamentary election in which the
Venezuelan opposition, the Democratic Unity Roundtable (Mesa de la Unidad
Democrática, MUD), could possibly gain control of the National Assembly. Since
former President Hugo Chavez' death in 2013, the United Socialist Party of
Venezuela (Partido Socialista Unido de Venezuela, PSUV) under the leadership of
Nicolás Maduro has struggled to maintain the political support and popularity
that his predecessor enjoyed for 15 years.

With economic turmoil and tumbling oil
prices, Venezuela's Bolivar currency continues to plummet in value as the
country is approaching hyperinflation territory. Venezuelans are also becoming
more disillusioned with the economic and monetary policies of Nicolás Maduro’s
government as they are experiencing chronic shortages and long lines for food
products like milk, meat and coffee and consumer goods such as toilet paper and
personal hygiene products.

There is absolutely no doubt that the
current economic hardships faced by many Venezuelans are the direct result of
political reactionary elements within the country that have continuously
attempted to sabotage the democratic process and economy. These right-wing
forces are mere puppets of US geopolitical and economic interests, receiving
funding and support by the CIA and the US State Department. From the Bush
Administration’s failed coup attempt of April 2002 to depose Hugo Chavez to the
Obama Administration’s public announcement in March of “Venezuela being a
threat to US national security”, US Imperialism is a deadly force to be
reckoned with for the PSUV and all other progressive forces in the country.

Nicolás Maduro's electoral victory in the
2013 presidential election to Henrique Capriles Radonski fell on a very close margin of 1.5%. Can the United Socialist Party of Venezuela enjoy a similar
fate in maintaining legislative control of the unicameral National Assembly?

The legacy of Bolivarianism in Venezuela
still resonates substantially with millions of Venezuelans, especially those
living in poor neighbourhoods (barrios) and the countryside. Inspired by the
political aspirations of Hugo Chavez, the United Socialist Party of Venezuela
and Nicolás Maduro still enjoy substantial levels of support all throughout the
country.

After winning democratic elections in 1998,
former President Hugo Chavez and his Fifth Republic Movement began their
mission to fighting extreme poverty, illiteracy and the vast inequalities that
engulfed the country. Chavez instituted his “21st Century Socialism” in all
spheres of Venezuelan society, the economy being the most fundamental indicator
of this transition. His government achieved remarkable results in
redistributing wealth through successful social policies, land reform programs
and the provision of numerous government services.

Chavez’ fiscal and monetary policies also
helped Venezuela attain economic sovereignty, predominantly via taking control
of the state-owned oil industry and combating the US pursuit of free trade by
instead fostering the economic integration of Latin America. The country’s oil
industry is by far the clearest indicator of the leadership’s attempt to
acquire economic sovereignty.

Historically speaking, the 1990s were
characterized by the so-called Oil Opening which included strategic
partnerships and operating agreements (mostly with American transnational
companies such as Shell and Esso) aimed at privatizing Venezuela’s oil
industry, PDVSA, which triggered big losses for Venezuela and its people. To
review and correct the bad deals that were instigated within the framework of
the Oil Opening, a new oil policy was adopted in 2004 to strive for “full oil sovereignty”. During the last decade, this process of gaining economic autonomy
has produced outstanding results for the social integration of the Venezuelan
people. Billions of dollars from oil revenues were used for social investment
which greatly helped all sectors of the population, especially the most
vulnerable and disadvantaged.

Another historical event worth highlighting
that clearly demonstrates the differences between Chavez and previous
administrations was the neo-liberal reforms implemented in 1989. When Carlos
Andres Perez became president in that year, Venezuela had close to $35 billion
in foreign debt and consequently, a massive portion of the country’s revenue
was used to finance that debt. At the time, President Perez had no choice but
to borrow money from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) which mandated structural
adjustment policies, most notably in neo-liberal economic restructuring and the
reduction of government spending. This resulted in huge price increases and
decreased state subsidies for public transportation among many other austerity
measures. Perez’ Economic Adjustment Plan was simply referred to as the
“Economic Package”. As it affected and hurt almost all Venezuelans, especially
the poor, it provoked civil unrest in the form of protests, street violence and
crime in massive proportions.

There is no question that the neo-liberal
economic policies implemented by the Carlos Andres Perez administration
(1989-1993) and also near the end of Rafael Caldera’s administration
(1996-1998) had substantially contributed to the impoverishment in Venezuela
due to the various privatization measures, decreases in social spending and
increases in public service costs. Poverty itself had changed for the worst as
it started affecting more and more of the middle class, never mind the poor.
Thus poverty became more generalized and diversified as it encompassed more
ethnically diverse groups. Public health care, for example, required patients
to buy all treatment supplies while public education imposed registration fees
for students and soaring costs for school supplies. These inequalities and
social injustices had grown rampant due to the lack of effective and affordable
public services and social safety net programs.

In
contrast to Perez’ presidency, Chavez attempted to abrogate all neo-liberal
reforms and unequal market allocations by implementing various intensive
redistribution mechanisms. Government expenditures on health and education were
dramatically increased (as a percentage of the national budget) and income tax
collection facilitated the redistribution of wealth more than ever before.

One interesting form of redistribution
worth discussing is the extensive micro-credit program which allows the poorest
elements of the county to start their own micro-enterprises (given to one
person or one family). To do this, the government created several micro-credit
state banks including the Banco del Pueblo (People’s Bank), Fondo de Desarrollo
Microfinanciero (Fund for Micro-Finance Development) and Banco de la Mujer
(Women’s Bank). The rise in micro-finance projects has been astounding as
demonstrated between 2004 and 2005 when private banks offered 140% more
micro-credits having an aggregate value of $500 million in 2005. Out of the
numerous redistribution mechanisms enacted by the former Chavez administration,
the micro-credit program is one of the most successful in alleviating the
poverty faced by millions of Venezuelans.

These particular forms of social investment
have aimed to fully integrate and help the least well off segments of the
population, predominantly minority groups such as women and Afro-Indigenous
Venezuelans. Since former President Chavez assumed power in 1999, the economic
downturn faced by millions of Venezuelans would change for the better. Women,
for example, have greatly benefited by government-sponsored programs like the
Madres del Barrio (Mothers of the Neighborhood) which fosters social inclusion
and community development.Madres del Barrio offers women the tools and expertise to attain success personally and also
economically by giving training, education and interest-free loans. Programs
like this became extremely useful for women, especially those who have always
worked inside the home.

Chavez’ creation of programs such as Mision
Ribas and Barrio Adentro have greatly related to the concerns of women,
especially in regards to health and education. Ordinary women from the barrios
of Caracas have also engaged more in politics at the municipal or grassroots
level. With these various programs and the general politicization of the female
population in this all-encompassing movement, women from the barrios became a
major component in the current Venezuelan urban social movements.

In regards to the social inclusion of the
Afro-Indigenous population of Venezuela, Chavez signed a decree in 2011 to
allow the enactment of the Organic Law against Racial Discrimination which
stipulates conditions to address, stop, and punish all forms of racial
discrimination. Chavez himself stated that Venezuelans are fighting for equality among all races of people, “We are all the same. There cannot be and
we do not accept any kind of discrimination in socialist Venezuela.”

The Bolivarian Revolution has politically
mobilized the poorest elements of Venezuelan society resulting in an
overwhelmingly popular and empowering political vision for the country. Chavez
relentlessly advocated national sovereignty and Latin American solidarity
against neo-liberal interference, predominantly from the US. In the process, he
involved and activated previously disjointed and poverty stricken segments of society (women, indigenous people and small farmers, etc.) and successfully
politicized and incorporated them into political life.

The legacy of Bolivarianism has certainly
improved the economic, social and political atmosphere for the majority of Venezuelans,
especially by raising the standard of living for the most impoverished sectors
of society. With the current economic difficulties and hardships that exist in
Venezuela, President Nicolás Maduro and the United Socialist Party of Venezuela
continue to hold substantial political and electoral support yet a strengthened
opposition movement which intends to supersede Chavismo “21st Century
Socialism” with the fulfillment of US geopolitical and economic interests in
the country.